“To the last man and the last shilling” and “Ready, aye ready”: Australian and Canadian Conscription Debates during The First World War
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The issue of conscription for overseas service was a hugely contentious issue in both Australia and Canada during the First World War, and the repercussions of it were felt for many decades. With a focus on the political rhetoric of the parliamentary conscription debates in the two countries, this article shows how this reflected the way Australians and Canadians saw themselves as peoples. The conflicting positions between English‐speaking Canadian and French‐Canadian parliamentarians on the issue highlights the bicultural nature of that country — as a criticism often made by the latter was that the former were British rather than Canadian. In contrast, in Australia there was no question about assisting the “mother‐country”; the differences arose over which method: volunteerism or conscription would be the most effective tool to do this. In terms of the impact that the parliamentary debates had on broader society, conscription led to Labour organisations being in battle against business and industry over the issue.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.070 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".